EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Report: Toxic Chemicals Found in Thousands of Children's Products
- Move Over, Koch Brothers: A Bigger, Darker Rightwing Funder Is Out to Destroy Public Education
- You and Your Family Are Guinea Pigs for the Chemical Corporations
- The Life and Death of Words, People, and Even Nature
- After Boston, Eyes-Wide Open Hope?
Popular content
Today's Top News
More Jefferson, Less Rove
We progressives sometimes get accused of being a lot better at criticizing than at offering positive solutions. At least I do, anyhow.
And I even think that's a somewhat fair assessment. But I also think there are some good reasons for such a negative cast to our rhetoric, at least if we're talking about the last three decades or so, and especially the last insufferable eight years.
One explanation for the largely critical nature of progressive political commentary is the defensive crouch we've been in during this period. Let's be honest, folks, progressives and progressivism - let alone plain old honest decency - have been under assault during this era, and it hasn't been pretty. More to the point, though, when you're fighting for your very existence, you have to fight for your very existence. You don't have the luxury of debating which of the various proposals for the model society are best. And if that's what you're doing, people will ignore you anyhow. They'll think you've got your head in the clouds, largely because you do.
Second, it was crucial to be critical of the incredibly destructive policies of the regressive right these last decades. Indeed, one of the major reasons they were as successful at implementing their noxious plans as they were is because of the almost complete absence of criticism from both the so-called opposition party and the from the so-called free media. There should have been a lot more criticism, not less. You can only get away with telling incredible whopper lies if no one calls you on them. George Bush is still doing it to this day, in his pathetic attempts to recast his presidency as he walks out the door. After a dozen or so interviews, I'm unaware of anyone who has yet asked a hard question. Indeed, I'm unaware of any ‘journalist' who even called Bush when he trotted out one of his monster lies, like how the Iraq WMD intelligence was ‘wrong', or how Saddam ‘kicked out' the inspectors.
Having said that, though, we are surely at the dawn of a new era in American politics. I don't know yet whether progressivism is part of Barack Obama's DNA, or whether - even if it isn't - events will force him in that direction anyhow. What I do know is that, regardless, he will be light-years ahead of what we've been suffering through for the last eight years.
And that means we can now start to think again about the society we want, rather than just giving our everything to avoid the society we cannot abide.
I'm not sure exactly how to express what's on my wish list this year - if it's not too late, Santa - but perhaps the following compare-and-contrast formula will at least start the process.
A positive progressive agenda for America? Okay, you betcha. In no particular order, I'd say:
MORE HONESTY, LESS DECEIT. We have just come through what is undoubtedly one of the most deceitful regimes in American history, epitomizing one of the most dishonest of political agendas. They had to lie, because what peasant ever wanted to be a victim of kleptocracy? So they did. Incessantly. This has to end, and will end, but the lies in American politics run so much deeper. There is so much - about foreign policy, about military spending, about the polarization of wealth, about religion - that can't even be talked about in this society. As we plunge headlong into a series of simultaneous crises we made for ourselves, the first order of business is to be able to discuss these things honestly.
MORE PEACE, LESS FIGHTING. To say that the United States is a bellicose actor on the world stage is to risk understatement of laughable proportions. Everyone, it would seem, knows it, except us, and even we have begun to get the hint. Yes, it's true, there are bad actors out there (unfortunately, we're among the worst), and some of them are implacable. But it is also true that if we ratcheted up our commitment to justice and to just talk, and cranked down our tendency to pull out the six-shooter every five minutes, there is a huge array of problems and threats that could be ameliorated significantly. Peace through diplomacy. What a concept, eh?
MORE RESPONSIBILITY, LESS DESTRUCTIVENESS. There's a common and scathingly shameful theme that underlies many of our problems-fast-becoming-crises, ranging from Iraq to national debt to crumbling infrastructure to global warming. And that is that we've been willing to be incredibly irresponsible as a society, sucking away whatever we wanted from others, even our own children if necessary, in order to live high on the hog now. Sometimes we actually like the destructiveness, though sometimes it is inadvertent, simply the inevitable byproduct of living irresponsibly. Either way it is embarrassing on a good day, and wholly shameful otherwise. We have to start living responsibly and sustainably.
MORE OPPORTUNITY, LESS RESTRICTION. Americans believe - indeed, it is a key part of our mythic ethos - that this is the land of opportunity. Historically, there was some truth to that, but today we lag other comparable societies in social mobility, and, of course, your race and sex and class and region still determine far too much of your opportunity in life. There is much to be done here, but if we had even the remotest inkling of a real commitment to equality of opportunity, we would begin by equalizing per-pupil revenues allocated to schools. Funding schools based on property taxes - producing wildly disparate spending ranging from the ghetto to the suburbs to the elite private campus - is as dead a giveaway as imaginable that this society is not serious about equality of opportunity, let alone equality of results. In this respect and countless others, we need to give people the opportunity to realize their full potential.
MORE EQUALITY, LESS PREJUDICE. Sometimes we get it right, and it should be acknowledged. Just over the course of my lifetime alone, we have witnessed remarkable changes in the ethos of equality in America, and in the pragmatic effects of changes in both policy and attitudes. The lives of women, blacks, gays and other out-groups are considerably improved over the last half-century's time, and it's hardly a news flash that the election of Barack Obama as president is a very big deal in this respect. But, of course, it has taken far too long, and there is far too much yet to be done before this job is complete. The good news is that Obama phenomenon is indicative of a spreading new attitude of indifference toward such primordial categorizations among younger Americans, for many of whom your race or sexual orientation is becoming about as consequential as the color of your hair. Legislation is important and necessary, but in the end this is the ultimate antidote to prejudice.
MORE RATIONALITY, LESS DOGMA. This country's Founders, the epitomization of Enlightenment thinking on this side of the Atlantic, would be aghast at today's America. In the last several decades, the regressive movement has indeed regressed this society badly - away from rationality, empiricism and analysis. None of these are perfect tools, and they have been known to create disasters of epic proportions when taken to extremes. However, they are always better than dogmas, which are of course human-made anyhow. In this world, there are no verities. We either make it up out of whole cloth, or we uncover it through painstaking observation, theorizing, and the testing of our notions, which can then be revised as demonstrated necessary. The latter is infinitely better. And America will be infinitely better once it gives up on false catechisms and remembers how to take cold looks at hard problems.
MORE COMPASSION, LESS SELFISHNESS. Noting the existence of astonishing disparities of wealth in our time, both domestically and internationally, and their exacerbation in recent decades, history is unlikely to judge us as a particularly generous people. Folks can rail against taxation and government programs all they want, but what those ultimately represent is a full societal commitment to taking care of each other, rather than leaving individuals to the mercy of hit-and-miss family relations or charities. We not only need to translate greater compassion into more generous government programs, we need to knock down the hyper-individualist ethos that has long been a key thread in the fabric of our political culture, and has long prevented us from taking care of each other properly.
MORE DEMOCRACY, LESS PLUTOCRACY. The dirty little secret of American politics is how much elites run the society, and the degree to which they do so for their own benefit, not for pursuit of any national aspirations. What was once a snobbish, Eastern Establishment, refined upper class, discretely listing toward benefitting the already benefitted, has now morphed into a full-blown kleptocracy. Government today, in the hands of regressives, has become little short of a cash cow to be gored at every opportunity. This country needs a political housecleaning, and a rebirth of its democracy. The anger on the street and the rising levels of voter turnout are a good and encouraging start.
MORE FREEDOM, LESS REPRESSION. America remains among the freest of societies when it comes to the public discourse, and yet the actual discussions in the mainstream media often sound as though they were describing another planet. The corporate self-censorship of information in this country is astonishing, as most recently displayed in the kid-glove treatment given to Sarah Palin (and the uproar on the right caused when she was asked the most innocuous of questions) and George W. Bush as he desperately tries to rewrite history on his way out the door. Fortunately, the advent of truly free mass media on the Web and the comic irrelevance of the mainstream are today combining to save the First Amendment from de facto destruction. All we need now, is to take the mainstream out of the mainstream media.
MORE INTELLIGENCE, LESS STUPIDITY. It's astonishing to watch, sometimes, the degree to which we as a society prize ‘regular guy' lack of intelligence in our leadership. George W. Bush was famously (s)elected, in part, because he was more of the kind of guy you'd like to have a beer with than that smarty-pants elitist, Al Gore. How massively insecure do you have to be in order to make a choice so detrimental, just so you can feel more comfortable about your own inadequacies over the coming four years? For all the talk in this country about excellence, it's astonishing the degree to which we don't actually practice it, especially in our politics. Isn't the idea of the best and the brightest refreshing? It takes judgement, too, but intelligence in leadership should be, er, a no-brainer!
MORE EDUCATION, LESS IGNORANCE. Likewise, trying to run a democracy on the foundation of an ill-informed or misinformed voting public is a doomed idea from the start. Unless, of course, democracy is just an inconvenience on the way toward kleptocracy - or better yet, a clever mask. It's amazing how little people know about politics and government in this country, and even more amazing the lies they believe that are fed to them by the likes of Hannity and Limbaugh. Regressives know they lose whenever ignorance is defeated. We need to help them in that process by valuing political participation more, and by producing more thoughtful and informed participants, literally as a goal of national policy.
MORE THOUGHTFULNESS, LESS FEAR. Part of the reason this society can be so ignorant and so stupid is because fear works so well at liberating us from our reasoning capacities. You might have noticed that the right has noticed this. Just a bit, eh? But, as on playgrounds everywhere, the most bellicose are typically the most fearful, just below the surface. Raising our self-esteem, raising our confidence, diminishing our fears and false arrogance - all of these would markedly improve the quality of our society and literally save millions of lives abroad.
MORE COURAGE, LESS RELIGION. And if we could really find some courage within ourselves, we might have a chance to diminish the role of religion in the society. Religion in politics is always a disaster and needs to be eliminated entirely. But its effects are far more pervasive than that, and extend throughout the psycho-societal landscape. A society that assuages its existential fears through the rigid and tenacious adherence to ludicrous fairytales will also be one that is fundamentally ripe for other such nonsense stories in the political sphere, and one that lacks the mental infrastructure, developed and sustained by habitual use, necessary for employing the right algorithms in decision-making. In plain English, meeting our deepest fears with soothing fictions encourages doing the same in politics.
MORE LAW, LESS POWER. The Founders were surely onto something when they argued for the concept of the rule of law, not of men. Too bad we've done such a lousy job of living up to their standards. In our legislative process, monied interests have now stopped yelling to get heard, or even speaking quietly, because they don't have to anymore. They just write the bills themselves. In our judicial process the role of money and power is so pervasive we hardly notice it anymore. While everyone was getting all agitated about race in the OJ Simpson trial a decade ago, the real story was that of class. Imagine if Simpson had been a poor man, with a public defender representing him. It's no accident that there are no wealthy people on death row. Entirely removing privilege, power, money and influence from our political and legal systems is not possible, of course. But we can do a lot better. And we would, if we were remotely serious about it.
MORE HUMILITY, LESS SUPERIORITY. Like all empires, America has a nasty habit of thinking it is superior to the rest of the world in every respect. And, unlike some others, this empire is even more driven in that direction by notions of religious authority and authorization. We pillage and plunder in the name of god. The unfortunate truth is that too often we Americans are like teenage science prodigies. We have the capacity to build devices capable of wholesale destruction, but those technical skills are unhappily combined with the lack of wisdom to know better than to actually do it. Everyone would be better off - this country and the nearly 200 other ones in the world - if we stopped thinking of ourselves as quite so exceptional.
MORE PROGRESSIVISM, LESS REGRESSIVISM. Things were NOT better in the thirteenth century, or the nineteenth, or even the 1950s. Although it is true that they were better, in many ways, in the 1960s, before the right started turning the clock backwards. In any case, some traditional notions are valuable. Others - like militarism, colonialism, racism, sexism, homophobia, monarchism, dogmatism or elitism - are not. We'd be far better served if we can stamp out this compulsion of ours to move backwards, instead focusing on how to move forward, carrying with us the best inventions of prior generations, and discarding the worst.
MORE JEFFERSON, LESS ROVE. Finally, there's this. Yes, I know that ol' Thomas was pretty imperfect, and that he knew how to play a rough game of politics that would actually often shock our sensibilities today. But he also had a noble side, and he could and did inspire an aspiration for that quality within succeeding generations. Karl Rove, on the other hand, never met a noble tendency he wasn't determined to drag into the gutter. He is the progeny of Joseph McCarthy and (his literal mentor) Lee Atwater. He is the personification of our politics for three decades now. He embodies, embraces and encourages our meanest (in both senses of the word) tendencies. No society is ever likely to be rid of the Karl Roves within its midst. But it is a sign of the most malignant sickness when they inhabit the White House, and worse yet, when they do so through presidency after presidency. It's time to start listening to our better angels again.
And, speaking of which, Abraham Lincoln once called this country "the last best hope of Earth". Whether it ever was that or not, clearly in the decades from which we now emerge, America has been, in too many ways, the best scourge of Earth, and quite possibly its last. We spend more on our military than all the other countries of the planet, combined. We use that military with a sickening frequency that no one matches, and few wish to. We are not content to simply ignore catastrophic environmental disaster, but smugly go so far as to exacerbate it, and to block others in their efforts to save our common and only home. We support and sometimes create the ugliest of repressive regimes on every continent of the planet.
It hasn't been pretty, and progressives have been right these last decades to scream bloody murder about what has been, quite literally, bloody murder.
Now it feels as though a new chapter is being written - not just the turn of a page to another new presidency - and an opportunity exists to recraft our polity, and to some extent the world.
However vague and platitudinous and Pollyannaish many of these suggestions may be, an America that moved in the directions outlined above would be a far better place than the sad and morally vacated one we are now leaving behind, hopefully forever.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


18 Comments so far
Show AllDMG, Thank you!
They had to lie, because what peasant ever wanted to be a victim of kleptocracy?
In the election of 2004, 54 million of the registered peasants of the USA (the Union of Serfs and Autocrats) voted to be victims of the kleptocracy. In the election of 2008, 46 per cent of the peasants did likewise, even though the autocrat(s) had already stolen nearly everything they had. You will find it very difficult now to find anyone who will admit to having voted for George Wanker Bush and Cheesedick Cheney, especially twice. But don't say the serfs don't like being victims of the kleptocracy and the kakistocracy. They love it!
Does America have problems? Plenty. Are things half as bad as this American bashing article says? Of course not. An article without balance is worthless.
I don't see this article as American bashing, I see it as an honest look into our flaws as a nation and common sense about why we need to correct them.
We will just have to disagree.
Just two examples he states I feel are dead wrong.
As to religion in our country/politics....religion played a big part in founding our country, has always played a part in our country. The only time religion was addressed by the founding fathers was that the state would establish no national religion. They never at any time envisioned no religion in our society. Simply read Washington's Thanksgiving speech. Or most early documents.
"as most recently displayed in the kid-glove treatment given to Sarah Palin"
I have never seen a more agressive, unfair, intolerant, nasty attack on a candidate for office. Never. Across the board. To say anything else is dishonest. Personal attacks, reports that later turned out to be false.
Was she qualified to hold that office, of course not. But her treatment was anything but fair or "kid glove". I'd say Obama got "kid glove" treatment if anyone did.
Maybe "bashing" is too strong a word like using genocide to describe small events. Lets just say he was less than even handed in my opinion and used a few of the cherished myths.
Happy New Year to you.
.Take that bit between your teeth and run with it....
The author's note concerning religion:
"MORE COURAGE, LESS RELIGION. And if we could really find some courage within ourselves, we might have a chance to diminish the role of religion in the society. Religion in politics is always a disaster and needs to be eliminated entirely. But its effects are far more pervasive than that, and extend throughout the psycho-societal landscape. A society that assuages its existential fears through the rigid and tenacious adherence to ludicrous fairytales will also be one that is fundamentally ripe for other such nonsense stories in the political sphere, and one that lacks the mental infrastructure, developed and sustained by habitual use, necessary for employing the right algorithms in decision-making. In plain English, meeting our deepest fears with soothing fictions encourages doing the same in politics."
. The author seems rather clear in this comment regarding religion; that it is to be kept separate from governing. Would you, I wonder, quibble with that assessment, especially in the light of the awful damage done by, or attempted by right wing christians in our government?
As to the rest of his opinion above , one which I share as a student of history and thus knowledgeable regarding the myriad of abuses done in the name of one religion or another, well that is of course a debatable point.
The Founders were Deist, if not in actuality then in leaning. The were, especially Jefferson and Madison, greatly influenced by the Anabaptists who wished separation of Church and State in order to protect the Church!
http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Thomas_Jefferson
Say nothing of my religion. It is known to God and myself alone. Its evidence before the world is to be sought in my life: if it has been honest and dutiful to society the religion which has regulated it cannot be a bad one.
Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear.
OK so Lincoln wasn't a founder, but the quote is just too darn good not to be included.
When I do good, I feel good; when I do bad, I feel bad, and that is my religion.
Abraham Lincoln (1809 - 1865)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism#Deism_in_the_United_States
Deism in the United States
Thomas Paine
In the United States, Enlightenment philosophy (which itself was heavily inspired by deist ideals) played a major role in creating the principle of separation of church and state, expressed in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Founding Fathers who were especially noted for being influenced by such philosophy include Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Cornelius Harnett, Gouverneur Morris, and Hugh Williamson. Their political speeches show distinct deistic influence. Other notable Founding Fathers may have been more directly deist. These include James Madison, John Adams, possibly Alexander Hamilton, Ethan Allen [32] and Thomas Paine (who published The Age of Reason, a treatise that helped to popularize deism throughout America and Europe). Elihu Palmer (1764-1806) wrote the "Bible" of American deism in his Principles of Nature (1801) and attempted to organize deism by forming the "Deistical Society of New York."
Currently (as of 2009) there is an ongoing controversy in the United States over whether or not the country was founded as a "Christian nation" based on Judeo-Christian ideals. This has spawned a subsidiary controversy over whether the Founding Fathers were Christians or deists or something in between.[33] [34] Particularly heated is the debate over the beliefs of Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and George Washington. As to whether George Washington was a deist, see this Washington Post book review of two books on the subject. For Jefferson's deism, see the article Was Thomas Jefferson a Deist? by Gene Garman (2001).[35] For Franklin, see Kerry S. Walters, Benjamin Franklin and His Gods (University of Illinois Press, 1999) and also an excerpt from the article Benjamin Franklin: An American Life by Walter Isaacson.[36]
However, Benjamin Franklin wrote in his autobiography, "Some books against Deism fell into my hands; they were said to be the substance of sermons preached at Boyle's lectures. It happened that they wrought an effect on me quite contrary to what was intended by them; for the arguments of the Deists, which were quoted to be refuted, appeared to me much stronger than the refutations; in short, I soon became a thorough Deist. My arguments perverted some others, particularly Collins and Ralph; but each of them having afterwards wrong'd me greatly without the least compunction, and recollecting Keith's conduct towards me (who was another freethinker) and my own towards Vernon and Miss Read, which at times gave me great trouble, I began to suspect that this doctrine, tho' it might be true, was not very useful."[37] [38]
For his part, Thomas Jefferson is perhaps one of the Founding Fathers with the most outspoken of Deist tendencies, though he more often referred to himself as a Unitarian. In particular, his treatment of the bible gospels entitled The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth (now more commonly known as the Jefferson Bible) exhibits a strong deist tendency of stripping away all supernatural and dogmatic references from the Christ story.
Lastly, Thomas, reflect on the wisdom in this:
To you I'm an atheist; to God, I'm the Loyal Opposition.
Woody Allen (1935 - )
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
.Postscript
As to the candidacy of Sara Palin, well, I believe there was remarkable restraint shown this possibly most unfit candidate in our nation's history. Many issues were not raised and even the comedy , while wildly funny in many cases, Tina Fey comes immediately to mind, was far from over th eline. Now, should you open your mind to the remarks OF Ms. Palin regarding Barack Obama's candidacy and personal history you might be seen as having a more rational position here.....
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Personally I think Palin should have been utterly crushed for the know-nothing that she is the first week she became known as the VP candidate. The conservative mainstream media in this country gives far too much credence to simple and obvious bullshit every single day. As for Obama's kid glove treatment, I did see an article or web posting that counted the newspaper articles on controversial issues for each candidate, and there were at least several times more about controversial Obama issues, such as Reverend Wright, than about McCain. I can't find this again however. And Happy New Year to you, may a year untainted by Bush (minus 3 weeks) be a far better one.
Funny I read this article as overly optimistic. From where I sit tings are worse than this article states and Green's statement that "we are surely at the dawn of a new era in American politics. I don't know yet whether progressivism is part of Barack Obama's DNA, or whether - even if it isn't - events will force him in that direction anyhow. What I do know is that, regardless, he will be light-years ahead of what we've been suffering through for the last eight years." seems to me to be looking at the world through rose colored glasses! Let us not forget how far toward Bush this nation was pushed by that right wing hack posing as a centrist Bill Clinton.
Obama is a far cry from progressive, better than Bush, well that's a rather low bar, but it still remains to be seen. Of course the idea that the power establishment would let a true progressive anywhere near the reigns of power is a bad joke.
"Never underestimate the power of very stupid people in large groups."
- John Kenneth Galbraith
"Funny I read this article as overly optimistic. From where I sit tings are worse than this article states and Green's statement that "we are surely at the dawn of a new era in American politics."
That could simply be from different points of departure. Many tghings he says about America you can say about most countrie, some are just ideology. But I do agree "we are surely at the dawn of a new era in American politics"
"Obama is a far cry from progressive, better than Bush, well that's a rather low bar,"
There can be no argument with this statement as far as better than Bush goes, how progressive he really is remains to be seen.
If he is to succeed he obviously cannot go to far left. You can't push people until they are ready. And I don't for one minute buy these wishful thinking articles about how the country has moved left. Yes the middle voted left, they seem ready to accept some of our policies, but they could turn on a dime if Obama is foolish.
Talking to the fartherest right friend I have (just short of Atilla) he flat said he's hoping Obama succeeds. He's willing to support him if he doesn't go hard left. This tells me a lot.
Happy New Year to you.
.Curious that, when honest polls are attempted, the views expressed by those polled are generally progressive in nature.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
DMG:You express what my heart hopes will be.
QUESTIONS, QUESTIONS, QUESTIONS
,WHAT,WHO,WHY,WHERE,WHEN
FREEDOM
WHAT is this thing called freedom that some say they have and don’t? Is it that the one claiming freedom is still walking around and not behind a guarded fence? The leaders who say that we must let them keep us safe but must give up rights that lead to freedom? And the ones behind the fence with no guilt or proof of guilt? This is freedom?
who would have this thing, this philosophy, this right called freedom? Is it just the strong that would proclaim it and use force to drive home that they are free and all the rest of peoples should be like them? Is freedom granted with a gun or like money; the more you have the more free you are? Does this sound like my country and is it exclusive to it? Yes to the first and an emphatic no to the second. When all the me’s understand that it is the “we” peoples of the whole planet that have the right, there will be no freedom for any. All we have is a mirage.
why would anyone care if the strong dominate the weak and impose their version of what would pass as freedom because they said so? Has it been ever thus? There is no sanity in any of this and The Creator; even with giving all free will had surely hoped and desired that all the created would think as a “we” peoples and not as a me people that used freedom as a word and not as a right that all deserved and had a right to.
Where on this planet should there be freedom? Is it just for certain races, peoples, nations, regions, Where is it written that only certain ones would be granted this most basic rights of all humans? My fundamental thought is that if all peoples were to practice the “we” concept there would be no more war and with all the divergent groups, nations and peoples doing their own thing trade and other commerce would flourish and with all the different climes strife would be minimized. Without the “we” concept freedom cannot be for any.
When is this ever going to be and has it happened before? It has happened before because if I thought of it then it has been out there before. Solomon had it right when he said that “there is nothing new under the sun”. So many chances in history from many parts of the globe and it just does not matter how old a person thinks the human race is it is still many failed chances. Hope reigns eternal though in my heart and soul for it to come to fruition.
Tony 9/4/08
Congratulations to Mr. Green for writing such a complete and relevant description of what is wrong in US society, and what is needed for it to be right. We can naturally exchange the values DMG listed by visualizing a utopia, seeking out the views that reveal the path to it. Mainly, it's the familiar golden rule and related ethical concepts that focus our eyes on the path. Americans can be ethical when rewarded for thinking. Americans will be unethical when rewarded for following. This article should be the topic of a year long civics course taught in every classroom in the USA. Motivation is created by making associations between the appropriate ideas. The other influence channels, the media, the church, the workplace, and the home, will also have to adopt the effective curriculum for the ethical journey to utopia. Get to work, people!
This is an inspirational piece,
David Michael Green!
And I like your additional comments, rtdrury.
This is a great article.
Thank you CD. It's nice to take a break from all the Obama/Israel bashing, right?
Obama is so much better than Bush in every possible way.
Obama is honest, Bush is deceitful.
Obama is believes in peace, Bush believes in fighting.
Obama is responsible, Bush is destructive.
Obama will create opportunities, Bush restricted them.
Obama stands for equality, Bush stands for prejudice.
Obama is rational, Bush is dogmatic.
Obama is compassionate, Bush is selfish.
Obama believes in democracy, Bush believes in plutocracy.
Obama is intelligent, Bush is stupid.
Obama values eduction, Bush values ignorance.
Obama is thoughtful, Bush is fearful.
Obama is courageous, Bush is a coward.
Obama believes in the rule of law, Bush wants power.
Obama is humble, Bush is not.
Obama is progressive, Bush is regressive.
Obama channels Jefferson, Bush is controlled by Rove.
"Now it feels as though a new chapter is being written - not just the turn of a page to another new presidency - and an opportunity exists to recraft our polity, and to some extent the world. ""
Obama will heal the US. Obama will heal the world. But only if we help him and stand beside him.
We must restore America's standing to the world.
We must once again become a beacon of hope.
We must embrace our history of liberty and democracy.
We must give the world something to aspire to.
We must return to the America of Jefferson, Lincoln, FDR, JFK, Carter, and Clinton.
If we don't - Palin 2012 - isn't far away.
And to do this we must make sure Obama does it, plain and simple. Criticism can be helpful, but idolization cannot be.
I'm not idolizing Obama.
.Well, maybe.....But you are certainly expressing opinion only.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin